I do not believe that these folks operate as a single-purposed entity, because their interests are varied, but nonetheless intertwined with all aspects of world activity.  They join forces when necessary to deal with a common threat to their existence.  If they allude to religious beliefs, they are not truly elite.  Delusions are not a common trait among those who see the big picture, and wield the power to move society in the directions that they desire.

Thanks for the seed of this idea, JD.

Does it serve us well to manufacture conclusions without evidence?  We've been doing it for centuries, and it seems to placate our need for answers, or meaning, but I think it's a huge waste of time and energy that only creates more questions and frustration.

I believe in our ability to evolve beyond the primitive mindsets.  Our future depends upon realistic and rational thinking, not belief in man-made religious concepts as "knowledge". 

In the real world, the concept of god doesn't even warrant theory status, so why is it that people continue to insist upon the existence of something that is not needed or required for life to exist?  Is our conciousness so primitive that we simply must manufacture imaginary entities, or "knowledge"?  Does the faith/belief paradox thinking serve a purpose beyond emotional comfort?  We have attached so many "meanings" to religious terms, that it has become almost laughable.  It's high time to move on...so why don't we?  

One of his finest works is from "You are all Diseased", and at the end of this particular routine, he coins the phrase he is most remembered for, "There's an invisible man...living in the sky!"  I can't paraphrase the sun-worship theory, and provide any justice to it, so if you appreciate Carlin, I suggest checking out one of the many youtube entries for "religion is bulls**t".

Apologies to the faithful. 

It could be here sooner than we think.  Genetic science is poised to unleash all sorts of possibilities, whether we're ready or not. 

I say, be considerate, keep it to yourself.

Perhaps this would be too radical, but it could be a good start toward a worldwide concensus on religion, nonetheless.  I know the non-believers can come up with a better term to start perpetuating in the 21st century.  I am becoming somewhat offended by the implications that arise from the use of it. 

(not meant to be a shot, hz)

My premise is this:   Educated people remain believers for what reason?  Why do I find their claims no more credible than those of the fundamentalists?   Wouldn't it be more plausible to actually prove the existence of something before we accept it as "real"?

Is it simply unacceptable to know that we do not know?

(Sorry bc)